GSTAT Thiruvananthapuram
For assessee
Case-law directory
Every ruling, in plain sight.
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
Case-law directory
Search and filter tax rulings from the Supreme Court, the High Courts, the GST Appellate Tribunal and the advance-ruling authorities.
50 rulings found
GSTAT Thiruvananthapuram
Where appellant transported TMT bars between own premises as internal stock transfer under same GSTIN without e-way bill, in absence of consideration and supply between distinct persons, movement did not amount to supply and no tax was payable, thus, penalty linked to tax was not leviable, and absence of e-way bill merely constituted document lapse, not impeaching transaction genuineness
GSTAT Thiruvananthapuram
Where registered trader's goods were detained in transit for missing e-way bill and penalty order in Form GST MOV-09 was issued 47 days after notice, section 129(3) mandated a strict seven-day limit, making such delayed order illegal and without jurisdiction, thereby rendering penalty unsustainable and proceedings barred by limitation
GSTAT New Delhi
Where homebuyer alleged profiteering on construction services for project with 36 units but only 5 flats were examinable due to free allotments and 5 percent scheme units, and DGAP found ITC ratio declined post-GST with no additional ITC benefit accruing, no price reduction obligation arose, reliance on CA-certified project-wise data was justified, and proceedings were to be closed GST: Where complaint alleged non-passing of transitional VAT credit benefit in construction services, but applicant's agreement was post-GST with VAT levied only on a nominal pre-GST advance, and ITC-to-purchase ratio fell after GST, no additional ITC benefit accrued and no profiteering attributable to respondent was established; DGAP's findings and circular-based benefit-passing confirmed
GSTAT Thane
Where refund order under section 142(3) as well as order in first appeal was passed by applying section 11B of Central Excise Act, appeal against such order was maintainable before CESTAT and not GSTAT, rendering revenue's appeal before GSTAT not maintainable
GSTAT New Delhi
Where anti-profiteering proceedings against real estate developer for Digangana Housing Complex were confined to period up to final occupancy certificate, DGAP found no additional ITC benefit post-GST regime as credit ratios pre- and post-GST were nearly identical, no obligation arose to pass on any benefit to homebuyers and anti-profiteering provisions were not contravened so proceedings were disposed of
GSTAT Thane
Where e-commerce operator transitioned pre-GST CENVAT and VAT credits to GST through TRAN-1 and no proceedings challenging eligibility of such credits were initiated or pending under erstwhile laws, initiation of recovery and denial of transitional credit solely at transition stage under GST Acts was beyond jurisdiction and unsustainable, as transitional provisions did not authorize fresh proceedings for admissibility under repealed laws. GST: Where appellant transitioned undisputed CENVAT credit via TRAN-1, authorities would be barred from reassessing correctness of erstwhile credits invoking transitional provisions, as invoice-level matching was futile for closing balances and ancillary discrepancies like mismatch of address or absence of description could not defeat transition; denial of transitioned input tax credit was unsustainable. GST: Where appellant transitioned Krishi Kalyan Cess (KKC) credit via TRAN-1 but later on they had to reverse it under protest being doubted by Department, denial of transition based on retrospective amendment and departmental circular was not sustainable since no notification had operationalised its exclusion and precedent of jurisdictional High Court as well as independent statutory reading supported transition, thus, making appellant's transition of KKC in order. GST: Where assessee transitioned CENVAT credit and VAT ITC balance on stock-in- trade as of 30.06.2017 and provided all requisite details without any specific objections or contrary evidence from revenue, generic allegations of missing documents could not justify denial in absence of any specific finding or material against assessee's claim.…
GSTAT Hyderabad
Where penalty was imposed for alleged fake invoicing without supply and all proceedings including show cause notice, order-in-original and appellate order arose prior to 01.10.2025, no pre-deposit was required for appeal before GSTAT as proviso mandating pre-deposit for penalty-only appeals came into effect prospectively from 01.10.2025 via Finance Act, 2025
GSTAT New Delhi
Where builder passed on entire and even excess computed additional ITC benefit to eligible pre-GST homebuyers in a residential project, as confirmed by DGAP in re-computation including goods in pre-GST purchases and with no contrary evidence, anti-profiteering requirements stood fully complied with and no contravention was made out
GSTAT Cuttack
Where assessee deposited pre-deposit at first appeal stage exceeding percentage of tax remaining in dispute after first appellate order, no further pre- deposit was required for admission of Tribunal appeal since earlier payment equalled or surpassed statutory requirement based on surviving disputed tax, rendering any fresh deposit unjustified
GSTAT Cuttack
Where appellant disputed any further statutory pre-deposit for Tribunal appeal after already depositing ten per cent of original disputed tax at first appeal, and first appellate order had reduced tax demand, no further pre-deposit was required for Tribunal stage since requirements under section 112 stood satisfied by earlier deposit. GST: Where Appellate Authority reduced demand and appellant filed Tribunal appeal paying court fee of Rs. 3,000 though minimum court fee prescribed under Rule 110(5) was Rs. 5,000 at Rs. 1,000 per one lakh, short payment existed and appellant was required to pay the balance